Ben's Q and A with civil liberties lawyer Mel Lipman

In preparation of this week’s “Crying Towel” column on H.R. 1955, I called wise and venerable civil liberties lawyer and professor of constitutional law Mel Lipman for his take on the legislation.

Crying Towel: There doesn’t seem to be much to do about H.R. 1955, is the liberty crowd overreacting?

Mel Lipman: I’m amazed it has not gotten more attention and what I have heard is that it is only a commission being set, not a law, just a commission to study the feasibility of doing away with civil rights until the war on terror is over because it is necessary for national security. Just considering what this commission is doing is scary. They’re studying setting up some kind of thought police as far as I’m concerned; it just brings us one step closer to Orwellian society.

CT: What can people do to combat this type of legislation?

ML: Just make people aware of it. I haven’t read a thing about the bill in the paper and have seen no publicity on TV. The scariest thing has been the public reaction. Comments I’ve heard is that I’m overreacting and I guess 404 members of congress felt the same way. They just blindly signed the bill without considering what they were doing. I blame the press and the media. If they’re not making the public aware of what’s going on, then how will the people know?

Advertisement

CT: What is the nitty-gritty of H.R. 1955?

ML: Not only is it vague, but the government fact sheet says it in no way curbs thought or speech, it just sets up a commission looking into restricting thought and speech. I’ve read all the fact sheets and I’m not convinced. They keep saying they will work to protect civil rights and civil liberties. A good book on this is Naomi Wolf’s book on how what’s happening here today is similar to how fascism rose under Hitler.

CT: You broke out the “H” word. Every time someone talks about fascism or what happened under Hitler’s Germany possibly happening again, they are looked at like they’re kooks.

ML: Right. But Hitler did things step-by-step, that’s how fascism came to power. Each step didn’t panic the people and by the time we realize we’re in boiling water it’s too late to jump out. Our government is doing away with habeas corpus. It’s the most frightening thing in the world when people are not told what they’re being charged with before arresting them and throwing them in prison for life. Hitler didn’t seize power, he was duly elected.

CT: When, if ever, will things get back to “normal” or as close to normal as they can be?

ML: The war on terror will last forever, so if you put people in jail for the duration of the war, that is a life sentence. In addition to the suspension (habeas corpus) we have illegal wiretapping—this happened back in the 50s and 60s under the COINTELPRO (counter intelligence program) when Frank Church’s investigation into J. Edgar Hoover’s violations of civil rights dug into what the FBI was doing. He made a statement that something like this will never again happen in the United States.

CT: Why aren’t our representatives preventing this from happening?

ML: Frankly maybe everyone in congress is brain dead about our own history, so we’re doing the same things over and over and each time it’s worse.

ML: Anything could be considered, just my conversation with you today, could be deemed to encourage terrorism. The bill does specifically target citizens, and we’re not talking about terrorist groups, the bill says planned use of force or violence. If I say “something’s gotta be done to stop this” that could be construed as planned force or violence. This bill also mentions the Internet as one of the main sources of terrorist propaganda and that’s scary when we start talking about the Internet. If I send an e-mail complaining about this government heading toward fascism, is that terrorist propaganda so let’s arrest Lipman?

CT: What about those who say the government is just trying to keep us safe?

ML: We have laws to prevent bombings and to prevent crimes. We do not need a commission to recommend new laws to make it illegal to commit a terrorist act, we already have those laws. If you catch someone planning to commit a terrorist act, you build a case against them and arrest them, but you do not arrest someone for simply thinking about committing a crime—that is thought crime. If I’m just thinking about it, just weighing the possibilities then it’s already too late, I’ve thought about doing something illegal and I will get arrested? The whole issue is: Where do you draw the line? It is not proper to justify arresting somebody for spreading propaganda, that is the whole basis of a free society.

CT: If this bill isn’t just to keep us safe, what good is it for the government?